War on Terror-why arn't we winning ?

Perhaps. Probably in the more gun-ho sense. I'd say more people would use it in the pejorative sense - so, perhaps, not Republicans.

 

Get in the way, really? A million innocent civilians, in the way? Is that like, America is the world dictator, get out of our way? That's some great excuse.

 

Will the real terrorist please step forward?

Who are the real terrorists?

Oh of course... they are the real terrorists.

We don't do stuff like that.

 

Hi Summerhill, sorry for the misunderstanding. Instead of taking my posts as a rebuttal directly at you, go ahead and take them at face value for the ideas presented.

They do peripherally connect, though. For instance, if you don't believe society is set up to hear and correct the grievances of the People (which for the most part it is not, if you follow my line of argument) then it is easy to see why people would resort to violence to avenge or redress perceived wrongs. It is imaginable that desperate people would feel that violence is their only recourse. In Democracies like ours, where money speaks the loudest of all, poor people may feel they do not have access to democratic mechanisms. It is easy to think of other examples of this kind.

As for solutions, none of the practical solutions are very likely. Increased crackdown and elevation of the "War on Terror" will not make anyone safer, that's for sure.

BTW, I believe there exists another class of terrorist which is essentially non-political but is more or less simply a mentally-ill person who commits violence while acting out a psychosis. This type of terrorism will also grow in years to come as individuals become more isolated, the society becomes more fragmented, and the means of committing violence become more widespread and accessible.

 

No worries my friend,you're a gentalman. I entirely agree with what you said (hence the quote) . Neither of our democracies are in a healthy state now,way too cosy at the top. Recalling how it was in the 70s Im dismayed at the lack of activism today.
In the UK voter turnout at elections remains chronicly low, theres a sense of apathy thats of real concern. perhaps we need a 'How do we take our Country Back!' thread !

Our disenfrachisement must be as nothing considering that suffered by a Palestinian,Afghani or Pakistani under constant physical threat from foriegn powers overwhich they've no influence at all and ignored by their own Government. Terrorism becomes the only course of action left.

 

We're not winning because "we" don't need to win. The oil is flowing,various leaders in other countries are being paid off and we still have millions of citizens that will willingly become cannon fodder for the corporatocracy. After all--"we've always been at war with Oceana". And the fear level is just about right.

 

What about from the perspective of the individual who got "in the way?" I think the military uses the term "collateral damage." Couldn't that innocent person correctly perceive the US as the real terrorists?

Why shouldn't a boy who witnessed his father being blown up by a US missile seek revenge for the death of his father when he becomes a man?

What if his only option, due to his poverty, is a suicide vest? And what if his only hope is to "at least kill some Americans" because he knows he can't touch the real perpetrators of the crimes committed against his people, his dead father and himself?

 

No, we're at war with East Asia, we've always been at war with East Asia.

 

"The people don't want war, but they can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. This is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and for exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country."

- Hermann Goring

 

I would hope that he/she has enough common sense to assume that the drone was being operated by someone affiliated with the US government and/or military, not American hot dog vendors or schoolchildren.

That's just plain murder, pure and simple.

 

East Asia as I know it, is comprised of China, Mongolia, Taiwan, North and South Korea, and Japan. Are you inferring North Korea to be who we are always at war with?

Violence, most often is a reaction of a person or persons who feel they have been or are being unjustly infringed upon by another or others, either directly or indirectly, which the perpetrator(s) use as justification for their actions towards an individual person or category of persons they deem contemptible collectively. The application of labels, American, Muslim, Republican, Democrat, Liberal, Conservative, White, Black, etc. are very often, and quite effectively, put to use irrationally, and with malicious intent or purpose.

It only takes a single person to commit an act of terrorism, so it is very unlikely to ever be eliminated, and all that can really be done is reduce the causes we can positively identify, and refrain from creating new causes to be dealt with in the future.

 

It was a literary reference. You missed it.

We are not literally at war with East Asia.

 

Let's just suppose you retaliated against the murder of your father by murdering the murderer. I don't think that's just plain murder. That kind of murder (if you want to call it that) should be in a different category of murder. I'd call it justifiable murder. The son did what was done to him.

Why shouldn't a boy who witnessed his father being blown up by a US missile seek revenge for the death of his father when he becomes a man?

 

"... It works the same in every country." - Hermann Goring



That line made me chuckle.

He says it so matter-of-factly, as if he has tested his theory.

 

No matter what system of government dominates the world at any time there will be those who hate it. Over 7 billion people on Earth and you can't please them all. While most resign themselves to the status quo and try to "be the change they wish to see in the world", there are extremists who will resort to violence. The attacks on Boston seem senseless, but many consider Americans as a people to be evil, corrupt blasphemers and that is how they justify random terrorism.

 

the only terrorists in my country were the invading brittish empire terrorists starting with cromwell who slaughtered the whole town of drogheda,every man woman an child in it while they sleapt unarmed,not knowing evil cromwell had just jumped onta a beach outta a boat in Ireland with one agenda only,to murderously slaughter innocent men,women and children in their in own beds, in their own homes, in their own country, who were at war with no one.his excuse for that.the voice of his protestant god told him ta do it.that was the start of our war of defence against them all.so if ya want ta know what real terrorists are i suggest you look to your own country,instead of calling the people who had ta fight back ta free their country from evil invading murderous tyranny terrorists.but i have yet ta meet a brittish subject who hasn't being brainwashed through lies ta believe otherwise and the ones that do see through it would never admit it for one reason and one reason only,that a lot of them themselves are are secretly ashamed of the doings of their our empire,so to call us terrorists instead of a courageous army of people who fought ta free their country and won.just a small bit left ta go.one day we'll have our north back legally to from those it dose'nt,never did,and never will! belong to.so call us what ye like.we know the truth.and all the lies in the world will never change that.

 

Thanks roamy. I hear what you are saying & this is one British subject who is ashamed of what was commited against the Irish people by that psychco Cromwell. Im part Irish & Scots descent . I was brought up a Catholic & educated by Brothers & Nuns. The crimes that the English commited against all of the Nations & peoples as they rose to and tried to maintain empire were the same as tyrants that had gone before them. Now we see America doing the same.

Terrorism ,then or now,be it State terror or that perpetrated by civilians against civilians cannot be justified. No cause is worth more than a human life unless it actually protects and prevents the killing of innoscents . Its the deliberate misinterpretation of that point by governments and civilian terrorists, the murder of innoscents who have had no hand in the conflict that is unacceptable.

Throughout the troubles all sides commisioned such acts,we should abhor them all,whatever our politics. I honestly believe that where civilians are carelessly killed or deliberately targeted by ANYONE in a conflict, the perpetraitors the should be tried as war criminals. It is apparently too much to expect that civilian terrorists adopt ethical 'rules of engagement' to avoid civilian tradgedy!

Within an established genuine Democracy terrorism is,I believe morally unjustifyable, however biased the authorities are . I recall that the Ulster Civil Rights Movement had achieved a great deal of sympathy on the British mainland in the 60s. The Government of the day were losing the moral arguments and theres ,and the protestants,treatment of the catholic population was causing a great deal of international pressure for change-not least from the USA. Those vital gains were eclipsed as soon as the PIRA began their violent struggle,triggering the same from protestant paramilitaries. The Catholic communities became isolated no-go areas. The PIRA did the catholics no favours!

In my post on page 3 (I think) I suggested that in some cases the general template of the 'Good Friday Agreement' may offer a solution to bring terror to an end but that it requires a large degree of selflessness on all sides to achieve. For that ,roamy, the PIRA deserve their share of the credit for the peace that has been achieved since.

 

Because it is impossible. It was designed knowing full well it's impossible, but a cause that can be used to justify whatever war we felt like being in.

Terrorism isn't a physical thing. It isn't a country. It isn't relegated to any one country. It's an action, an idea, one that happens all over the world, on a daily basis.

A war on terrorism makes just as much sense as a war on trade, or a war on fingernail biting.

It isn't a war. It's a method of controlling popular opinion, to start wars without trouble.

 

Revenge perpetuates the cycle of violence. It is wrong. There is no such thing as justifiable murder. It is just plain murder.

 

I could not agree more !

 

I don't personally agree with that line of reasoning but I can see how someone in a desperate situation might reason that way. The subject of this thread is terrorism. People who are terrorized don't necessarily always reason in moral ways.

If a boy witnesses his father being blown up by a bomb of the occupying force there's gonna be a lot of justified hatred imo. I guess we just disagree on that.

You might say he should just suck it up but I don't see it that way. The boy owes no one forgiveness.